rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Nothing much changes with new 'Plan Nord'

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca today for as little as $1 per month!

Photo: Toban B./flickr

Last month, on April 8, the government proudly announced its new revamped Plan Nord. Premier Philippe Couillard's project, though much less ambitious than that of Charest's government, appears to be just as risky.

The government is intent on investing $2 billion to build infrastructure in the North in order to make it easier for mining companies, usually foreign-owned, to gain access to the resources. By 2035, some $20 billion will have been invested by Hydro-Québec on new projects to reinvigorate the North's economy. (It's worth mentioning that details regarding these investments have not been made available.)

The profitability for taxpayers was already uncertain when metal prices were at a historic high in 2011. It therefore seems unlikely that the new Plan Nord will be cost-effective in a context in which metal prices have been declining for the last four years and that growth in countries like China is the slowest it has been for decades.

Considering that the return on royalties for 2015-2016 is projected at $65 million and that mine site rehabilitation costs alone should reach $1.2 billion, it seems that going down the mining rabbit hole does not reap many benefits for the people of Quebec.

Does the government of Quebec have a choice?

Developing the mining extraction sector -- despite the government's pressing will to do so -- is not profitable. Of course, some businesses do manage to reap profits, but we tend to forget that Quebec is a minor player on the world stage. At best, Quebec extractions represent around 0.6 per cent of iron extractions worldwide and around 1 per cent for gold (p. 5 of the PDF). In fact, we usually fall into the third or fourth quartile when compared to the rest of the world in terms of production costs. For foreign investors, there are a good number of places more profitable to develop than Quebec. A mining company would therefore simply choose to develop more easily accessible ore deposits somewhere where ore density per m3 and extraction costs offer a better deal than in Quebec.

If the government fails to insist on the need for local processing, taxpayers are shouldering the risk of developing a mining industry without any actual guarantee of future development. In that case, shouldn't Quebec set aside the idea of paying out-of-pocket for foreign mining companies?

It should, unless it insists that foreign companies ensure local processing in exchange for the state's gifts.

However, the government remains suspiciously silent regarding this issue. Why?

First, in Quebec, metal processing is given many different definitions. (Pre)primary processing, which consists in converting extracted metal into easily exportable pellets, is the most commonly found in the North of Quebec. It does not generate many jobs: processing needs to be further developed to sustain a regional economy. Quebec certainly has more work to do.

Of the 27.5 million tons of iron extracted in Quebec, only 11 per cent is processed within the province according to a study published on behalf of the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal (p. 4 in the PDF). It shows that each 10 per cent increase in processing (primary, secondary, and tertiary) creates around 7,500 jobs and contributes to increasing the GDP by $758 million (p. 6).

Why then does the state refrain from demanding that a processing plant be built within its borders when it lends $100 million to a Chinese mining company? The benefits for regional development would be much greater, both for the population and for the return on investment. For example, Newfoundland-and-Labrador demanded that the mining company developing the Voisey's Bay mine build a $13-million research centre to create more jobs in the area. For their part, Ontario and the North-West Territories have requested that up to 10 per cent of diamonds extracted on their land be set aside to be cut locally.

Why can't Quebec be as demanding as its neighbours are?

This article was written by Bertrand Schepper, a researcher with IRIS, a Montreal-based progressive think-tank.

Photo: Toban B./flickr

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.

Comments

We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:

Do

  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.

Don't

  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.